Campoplex concretus, Han & Achterberg & Chen, 2021
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5066.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:6B3D85E9-31FE-4D08-8E15-BA8959DD1988 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5653867 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039687B1-475C-6C08-9DD1-1D900C2E7CB3 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Campoplex concretus |
status |
sp. nov. |
Campoplex concretus sp. nov.
Figs. 19–20 View FIGURE 19 View FIGURE 20
Material examined. Holotype: female, Guizhou, Daozhen Dashahe, 18.VIII.2004, Wu Qiong, No 201505028 ( ZJUH) . Paratype: 1 male, Guizhou, Daozhen Dashahe, No 201503196 .
Description. Female ( Fig. 19 View FIGURE 19 ) holotype. Body length 5.7 mm, fore wing length 4.3 mm.
Head. Antenna with 32 flagellomeres; first flagellomere 1.1× length of second flagellomere. Face ( Fig. 20E View FIGURE 20 ) granulose-punctate. Clypeus ( Fig. 20E View FIGURE 20 ) sparsely punctate, polished, slightly convex, apical margin slightly curved. Malar space granulose, 0.6× basal width of mandible. Mandible with a very weak lamella. Frons granulose-punctate, median carina absent. Vertex granulose. Interocellar distance ( Fig. 20F View FIGURE 20 ) 1.8× ocello-ocular distance and 2.0× distance between median and lateral ocelli. Temple granulose, mat. Occipital carina evenly arched, reaching hypostomal carina before mandible base.
Mesosoma. Pronotum punctate dorsally, trans-striate below. Mesoscutum ( Fig. 20G View FIGURE 20 ) granulose-punctate, rugose on notaulic area anteriorly. Scutellum punctate, rugose posteriorly. Metanotum rugose-punctate. Mesopleuron ( Fig. 20B View FIGURE 20 ) punctate, trans-striate below tegula, speculum smooth and shiny. Propodeum ( Fig. 20C View FIGURE 20 ) smooth and compact; area basalis trapezoid; area superomedia nearly smooth, shiny, with few small punctures; area petiolaris trans-striate; area superomedia confluent with area petiolaris, not depressed medially; all carina strongly developed; propodeal spiracle small and oval.
Wing. Fore wing ( Fig. 20A View FIGURE 20 ) areolet present and with a moderate stalk emitting 2m-cu vein from its apical part. Marginal cell short, distal part of surrounding vein 1.7× longer than proximal one. Vein 1cu-a slightly distad of M&RS. External angles of second discal cell acute (70°). Hind wing with nervellus intercepted at lower 0.1 of its length.
Legs. Hind femur 4.1× longer than wide. Inner spur of hind tibia 0.5× as long as first tarsomere of hind tarsus. Tarsal claws strongly pectinate.
Metasoma. First metasomal segment ( Fig. 20H View FIGURE 20 ) round in cross-section of basal 0.3, with dorso-lateral carina and lateral groove very weak. Postpetiole and second tergite granulose, subpolished. Second tergite 0.6× as long as first tergite, 0.8× as long as its apical width; thyridium round, its distance from basal margin of tergite 1.5× its diameter. Third tergite 0.55× as long as its apical width. Sixth and seventh tergites without emarginations medially. Ovipositor sheath approx. 1.8× longer than hind femur, ovipositor ( Fig. 20D View FIGURE 20 ) gradually upcurved.
Colour. Black. Mandible medially and palpi, yellowish brown; tegula yellow; scape and pedicel brown; fore and mid coxae and apical tarsal segments brown, remainder of fore and mid legs yellowish brown; hind leg coxa and trochanter blackish brown, tarsus brown, remainder of hind leg yellowish brown; metasoma black with second and third tergites somewhat blackish brown basally.
Male. Essentially same as female.
Distribution. China (Guizhou).
Comparative diagnosis. This species is similar to C. hei sp. nov., but differs from the latter by having pronotum punctate dorsally, metanotum rugose-punctate, propodeal carina strongly developed, thyridium away from basal margin of tergite 1.5× its diameter, and metasoma with second and third tergites somewhat blackish brown basally.
Etymology. Name derived from “concretus” (Latin for “thick”), because its propodeum is compact.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |